Michigan, Workers must not have a choice! Vote Union

[Liar]

Irrelevant.

You ask a question that has no bearing on the issue of whether a worker should have the right to refuse to join a union and still retain employment.

Should a worker have the right to refuse to join a union and still retain the benifits of the work the union has done?

ALL the work the union has done, not only the latest round of collective bargaining for wages and benefits.

Right-to-work would be fair, if those who don't contribute to the union don't get to enjoy, for instance, the workplace safety standards that the union lobbied for and won. No due? No helmet.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I guess that unions now are a great get-out-the-vote tool.


I think they have probably served their purpose, rather like the village blacksmith.


I think I shall carry my capitalist ass to work and oppress it now . . . .

They did serve a purpose in a Liberal society, but in a Socialism, they are an unnecessary redundancy.

In a Libertarian Society, Unions are a necessary good that improves productivity.
In a Socialist Society, Unions are a redundant evil that reduces productivity.
A_J, the Stupid

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I made more money working non-union. That is, working non-union I worked locally, unions jobs were mostly outta town in remote places requiring commutes of 75-100 miles one-way. Even Tallahassee, 200 miles away, was considered 'local' union employment without travel money or per diem for motel. Plus the union cut the pay to work in Tallahassee.

 

[jeninflorida]

Should a worker have the right to refuse to join a union and still retain the benifits of the work the union has done?

ALL the work the union has done, not only the latest round of collective bargaining for wages and benefits.

Right-to-work would be fair, if those who don't contribute to the union don't get to enjoy, for instance, the workplace safety standards that the union lobbied for and won. No due? No helmet.

OMG, and imagine if a union worker was "earning" $15 an hour and a non-union worker was pulling in $20 an hour

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

OMG, and imagine if a union worker was "earning" $15 an hour and a non-union worker was pulling in $20 an hour

The union no longer sets workplace safety, that's OSHA...

The Union does not own the job, the company does.

If you get fired, you do not take the job, or the "benefits" with you.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

What about all the non-union jobs lost when Unions take out their companies as they did with GM and Hostess???


What did those people do to deserve losing their job because the unions would not negotiate in good faith?

 

[Liar]

OMG, and imagine if a union worker was "earning" $15 an hour and a non-union worker was pulling in $20 an hour

Got no problem with that.

Do you have a problem with what I proposed?

 

[mercury14]

I have challenges with a lot of these studies as everyone knows statistics tell great lies.

people should make as much money as they are worth. unions like to put this number at an artificial level

union's offer little flexibility and protect workers that should be fired. just look at the number of "teachers" that became administrators due to being "unfit" to be in the classroom. a company must have the right to fire dead weight and unfit workers

union were great 100 years ago. but the mind set of union leaders is still that of someone living in 1900

This isn't a statistic, it's a comparison of two figures.

Workers who violate rules can still be fired if they're union. Why would you think otherwise?

 

[mercury14]

What about all the non-union jobs lost when Unions take out their companies as they did with GM and Hostess???


What did those people do to deserve losing their job because the unions would not negotiate in good faith?

The union vote to not accept the new Hostess contract was like 92%, even in the face of shutting the company down.

 

[mercury14]

the union will not go away in schools, government, or the auto world.

also companies must have the right to move the business to where ever they see fit. not like the obama that has blocked Boeing from moving. then again, we all know that obama is a terrorist. in time, I hope obama is tried for crimes against America

If they effectively lose their ability to bargain, they effectively go away. What part of that do you not understand? Go look at what the Texas AFL-CIO can't do.

The union no longer sets workplace safety, that's OSHA...

Unions still negotiate for workplace conditions and/or lobby congress to alter standards though. Unions also negotiate for things like... what happens when a worker is injured on the job.

 

[klippert]

I betting the unions are going to show some serious Brown shirt tactic today... They had themselves 'Civil disobedience' Training yesterday at Local Union Slob 600....

Sore losers...guess the union is to angry, to Marxist, to violent....it's time for a change for the unions. they need a kinder gentler happier face. Not such a violent one.....there leadership is to old, and to white....and paid WAY TO MUCH....those evil one per-centers...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I betting the unions are going to show some serious Brown shirt tactic today... They had themselves 'Civil disobedience' Training yesterday at Local Union Slob 600....

Sore losers...guess the union is to angry, to Marxist, to violent....it's time for a change for the unions. they need a kinder gentler happier face. Not such a violent one.....there leadership is to old, and to white....and paid WAY TO MUCH....those evil one per-centers...

Yes, violence is their rule, for they are a mob.

They know the Federal government will condone it...

 

[miles]

I prefer to negotiate with myself...
I'm already management and I really haven't even shown up to work yet...

You don't have to show up for work. Telecommuting lends itself nicely to taking food directly from the mouths of hard working employees.

 

[mercury14]

In every thread like this the same RW characters advocate for lower wages, lower standards of living, less education, less access to medical care, less consumer spending.

And then they walk around bewildered as to why they just got their asses handed to them in the election. They seriously don't know.

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Some folks have principles and believe in individual merit not the mediocre elevating "collective."

Why is it that we are accused of it, but only the collective mentality of merc, Throb, U_D, zip, Petey, et.al., is actually able to deliver it...


:shrug:

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You don't have to show up for work. Telecommuting lends itself nicely to taking food directly from the mouths of hard working employees.

I hope the hell I'm not outsourced before I show up...

 

[mercury14]

Some folks have principles and believe in individual merit not the mediocre elevating "collective."

I believe in both the individual and in society. Basically I believe what 90% of Americans believe.

 

[Dazzle1]

If you had the choice would you choose to be in a union or choose to make less money and worse benefits? What would your family want you to choose?

You don't make less money in right to work States. Workers should not have to pay protection money

And companies should not forced to be unionized nor should the public be forced to endure substandard work and higher cost with PLA.

Go Michigan, break the union

 

[mercury14]

You don't make less money in right to work States.

So is my link wrong (BLS via Wikipedia)? It looks like solid analysis to me but if you can find fault in it let me know or suggest a better data source.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Unions lead to higher wages.

This is a sophism easily dismissed as a variant on Bastiat's Broken Window.

The easily seen is that, yes, a Union worker can engage in group "force" and extort a higher collective wage. However, the unseen cost of this artificial wage floor is in the reduction of the total number of jobs available and thus more willing workers are not hired as are the unskilled. Now, this affects the economy negatively for they cannot participate and the Union wage is insufficient to replace the lost activity in the market and this loss of vitality further exacerbates the dearth of jobs directly due to the lessening of economic activity.

If workers can bid down the price of labor, then more can be hired and more can participate more fully in the general economy and this, in turn, has a positive effect in creating more jobs which then naturally begins driving up the wages of the more skilled and desired among the various employers.

Is short if we look at a worker, we see the union benefit, but if we look at the economy we see the greater harm done to the class of workers due to declining economic opportunity; a variant of the discussion of tolls and barriers in Sophisms of the Protectionists.

 

[mercury14]

Unions lead to higher wages.

This is a sophism easily dismissed as a variant on Bastiat's Broken Window.

The easily seen is that, yes, a Union worker can engage in group "force" and extort a higher collective wage. However, the unseen cost of this artificial wage floor is in the reduction of the total number of jobs available and thus more willing workers are not hired as are the unskilled. Now, this affects the economy negatively for they cannot participate and the Union wage is insufficient to replace the lost activity in the market and this loss of vitality further exacerbates the dearth of jobs directly due to the lessening of economic activity.

If workers can bid down the price of labor, then more can be hired and more can participate more fully in the general economy and this, in turn, has a positive effect in creating more jobs which then naturally begins driving up the wages of the more skilled and desired among the various employers.

Is short if we look at a worker, we see the union benefit, but if we look at the economy we see the greater harm done to the class of workers due to declining economic opportunity; a variant of the discussion of tolls and barriers in Sophisms of the Protectionists.

Collective bargaining states have higher wages and lower unemployment. That's nice that you have a theory but it's squashed by reality just like the rest of your theories.

 

[jeninflorida]

In every thread like this the same RW characters advocate for lower wages, lower standards of living, less education, less access to medical care, less consumer spending.

And then they walk around bewildered as to why they just got their asses handed to them in the election. They seriously don't know.

I've never said lower wages. Hell, SQL DBA went from 40k to 120k salaries and I was all for that. You are confused and have issues with the private sector.

Now, American Citizens need to form a union to protect us from Government, Government workers, and the Union

 

[mercury14]

I've never said lower wages. Hell, SQL DBA went from 40k to 120k salaries and I was all for that. You are confused and have issues with the private sector.

Now, American Citizens need to form a union to protect us from Government, Government workers, and the Union

You advocate for policies that lead to lower wages and lessened health care and retirement benefits.

 

[chillywilly2]

What about all the non-union jobs lost when Unions take out their companies as they did with GM and Hostess???


What did those people do to deserve losing their job because the unions would not negotiate in good faith?[/QUOTE]

Where do you get that from.

How many times did the company cut wages before the union MEMBERS said enough is enough...we ain't working for that kind of money